English
 
User Manual Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Interactive Multiple Object Tracking (iMOT)

Thornton, I., Bülthoff, H., Horowitz, T., Rynning, A., & Lee, S.-W. (2014). Interactive Multiple Object Tracking (iMOT). PLoS ONE, 9(2), 1-19. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0086974.

Item is

Basic

show hide
Item Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0027-8063-1 Version Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0001-8766-4
Genre: Journal Article

Files

show Files

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Thornton, IM, Author              
Bülthoff, HH1, 2, Author              
Horowitz, TS, Author
Rynning, A, Author
Lee, S-W, Author
Affiliations:
1Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, ou_1497797              
2Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, Spemannstrasse 38, 72076 Tübingen, DE, ou_1497794              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: We introduce a new task for exploring the relationship between action and attention. In this interactive multiple object tracking (iMOT) task, implemented as an iPad app, participants were presented with a display of multiple, visually identical disks which moved independently. The task was to prevent any collisions during a fixed duration. Participants could perturb object trajectories via the touchscreen. In Experiment 1, we used a staircase procedure to measure the ability to control moving objects. Object speed was set to 1⁽^∘}⁾/s. On average participants could control 8.4 items without collision. Individual control strategies were quite variable, but did not predict overall performance. In Experiment 2, we compared iMOT with standard MOT performance using identical displays. Object speed was set to 2⁽^{∘⁾/s. Participants could reliably control more objects (M = 6.6) than they could track (M = 4.0), but performance in the two tasks was positively correlated. In Experiment 3, we used a dual-task design. Compared to single-task baseline, iMOT performance decreased and MOT performance increased when the two tasks had to be completed together. Overall, these findings suggest: 1) There is a clear limit to the number of items that can be simultaneously controlled, for a given speed and display density; 2) participants can control more items than they can track; 3) task-relevant action appears not to disrupt MOT performance in the current experimental context.

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 2014-02
 Publication Status: Published online
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Method: -
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0086974
eDoc: e86974
BibTex Citekey: ThorntonBHRL2014
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: PLoS ONE
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: -
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 9 (2) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 1 - 19 Identifier: -